New Articles

How Streamlining Payments Helps Build Vendor Relationships

payments

How Streamlining Payments Helps Build Vendor Relationships

I’d like to dispel some common misconceptions about B2B payments. First, the misconception that vendors don’t want to be paid by check. Next, let’s dispel the notion that vendors won’t take card payments.

I’ve worked in payments for a couple of decades now. I’ve managed cash handling, check processing, and lockbox operations. I’ve spent the last 10 years or so in the Mastercard B2B space. Based on my experience, I can tell you what vendors really want: convenience and choice.

Doesn’t everyone?

New choices

It used to be that the customer could dictate a payment method and vendors had no choice but to accept. That has been slowly changing. We saw a lot more vendors raising their hands to ask for electronic payments during the COVID-19 Pandemic, but this shift began even before that. Fintech companies have introduced a lot of new payment options, and vendors are more aware that they have choices.

It now falls to buyers to give vendors the convenience and choice they want, without overburdening their accounts payable departments. That means using automation to streamline payment and vendor enablement workflows. AP can then easily accommodate all payment types and let vendors choose what’s most convenient for them.

Different definitions of convenience

When vendors want to be paid by check, it’s often because they have some sort of mechanism that makes it easy to process them. In larger companies for example, that often means using their treasury bank to do lockbox processing for them. Banks will often provide this service for free to win other, more profitable business.

The bank collects all the checks from the lockbox, keys in the data and deposits them. All accounts receivable has to do is absorb a file that has all of the check data. That is a pretty clean process, and a compelling reason to be paid by check.

What about ACH? There’s no paper to handle, and the vendor gets the money faster. Why wouldn’t they want ACH payments? Well, ACH fraud is on the rise, and not all vendors want to risk exposing their banking data to their buyers.

Vendors might actually prefer a single use credit card. The common wisdom against that thought is that vendors won’t want to pay credit card fees. The reality is that virtual cards are gaining in popularity because you get paid fast and fraud risk is low. You don’t have to expose your banking data, and the card number becomes unusable once it’s been processed. For some vendors, that’s worth the fee.

No limits

The point is there’s a market for all payment types. For a buyer to limit themselves to just one or two payment options is to potentially limit whom they can do business with. With all the supply chain problems we’ve been experiencing it’s incredibly important to keep your vendors happy. The best way to do that is to make sure they get paid on time, in the manner of their choosing.

The problem, as many AP teams learned during the pandemic, is that doing electronic payments at scale is a lot harder than it seems at first glance.

You need to have the resources to enable vendors for electronic payments, on an ongoing basis. That means continual outreach to find out which vendors will accept a card or an ACH. It means collecting and verifying their banking data when you onboard them, and having processes in place to verify any requests to change bank account information. It means having a way to know if a virtual card payment hasn’t been processed, and a way of dealing with a card that is still open.

You also need very strong systems and processes in place to protect your organization against ACH fraud. If you’re not up to speed on using technology to validate and secure vendor information, and fend off fraud attacks, you’re putting your organization at risk.

AP teams already tend to be short-staffed. Turnover is high, and the amount of process documentation they have is low. They don’t have the capacity to take on this extra work.

Here’s where it gets good: AP teams shouldn’t have to take on extra work to make electronic payments work. The whole process can be streamlined by working with a payment automation provider. Automation providers typically provide a single workflow for all types of payments. All the person in AP has to do is select who to pay, and the provider will pay each vendor by their preferred method.

More importantly, automation providers take on all the work of enablement, including outreach and safeguarding vendor data. They also indemnify their customers against fraud. It couldn’t be more streamlined–all AP really has to do is click pay.

Convenience and choice for all

Checks have been the prevalent B2B payment method for a very long time, and for some very good reasons. The COVID-19 Pandemic, and our current supply chain woes, have made many organizations reconsider check use.

Vendors are increasingly aware that they do not have to let the buyer dictate how they get paid. Vendors now know that they are able to come to buyers and say, “We’ve got three payment options for you to choose from,”.

Fintech companies are providing new choices for buyers, too. Payment automation lets them offer vendors convenience and choice, without inconveniencing themselves. It’s a win-win, and that is the best possible way to build a relationship.

_____________________________________________________________________

Kim Lockett is Vice President of Customer Success and Services for Nvoicepay, a FLEETCOR company. She has more than 30 years of experience in payments, with a heavy focus on back-office operations and customer engagement. Prior to Nvoicepay, Kim held operations management and leadership positions with Comdata, Crestmark Bank, and Regions Bank.

amine compounds

China Remains the Largest Amine Compounds Supplier in Asia-Pacific

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Asia-Pacific – Amine-Function Compounds – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

Amine Compounds Exports in Asia-Pacific

In 2018, approx. 1.1M tonnes of amine compounds were exported in Asia-Pacific; picking up by 8.6% against the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +5.1% from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when exports increased by 15% y-o-y. Over the period under review, amine-function compounds exports reached their maximum in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, amine-function compounds exports stood at $3.3B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +1.8% over the period from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations over the period under review. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 when exports increased by 16% y-o-y. Over the period under review, amine-function compounds exports attained their peak figure in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Exports by Country

China was the major exporter of amine compounds exported in Asia-Pacific, with the volume of exports amounting to 785K tonnes, which was approx. 72% of total exports in 2018. It was distantly followed by India (121K tonnes), Japan (81K tonnes) and South Korea (65K tonnes), together making up a 25% share of total exports.

China was also the fastest-growing in terms of the amine-function compounds exports, with a CAGR of +7.8% from 2013 to 2018. At the same time, India (+5.5%) and South Korea (+3.4%) displayed positive paces of growth. By contrast, Japan (-5.6%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2013 to 2018, the share of China and India increased by +23% and +2.6% percentage points, while Japan (-2.5 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($2.1B) remains the largest amine-function compounds supplier in Asia-Pacific, comprising 64% of total amine-function compounds exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by India ($521M), with a 16% share of total exports. It was followed by Japan, with a 11% share.

In China, amine-function compounds exports expanded at an average annual rate of +3.3% over the period from 2013-2018. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: India (+1.3% per year) and Japan (-2.5% per year).

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the amine-function compounds export price in Asia-Pacific amounted to $3,029 per tonne, picking up by 2.8% against the previous year. In general, the amine-function compounds export price, however, continues to indicate a significant downturn. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 an increase of 2.8% year-to-year. The level of export price peaked at $3,558 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, export prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Japan ($4,386 per tonne), while South Korea ($2,426 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Japan, while the other leaders experienced a decline in the export price figures.

Amine Compounds Imports in Asia-Pacific

In 2018, the amine compounds imports in Asia-Pacific amounted to 1M tonnes, surging by 11% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +3.0% over the period from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 with an increase of 11% year-to-year. In that year, amine-function compounds imports attained their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, amine-function compounds imports totaled $3.2B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +2.0% over the period from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 with an increase of 16% against the previous year. In that year, amine-function compounds imports reached their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

In 2018, India (253K tonnes), distantly followed by Japan (162K tonnes), South Korea (147K tonnes), China (146K tonnes), Taiwan, Chinese (60K tonnes) and Singapore (54K tonnes) represented the largest importers of amine-function compounds, together comprising 82% of total imports. Indonesia (43K tonnes) held a little share of total imports.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by India, while imports for the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Japan ($651M), India ($612M) and South Korea ($562M) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, together accounting for 58% of total imports.

In terms of the main importing countries, India recorded the highest growth rate of the value of imports, over the period under review, while imports for the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the amine-function compounds import price in Asia-Pacific amounted to $3,152 per tonne, rising by 4.4% against the previous year. Overall, the amine-function compounds import price, however, continues to indicate a mild deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 an increase of 5.1% against the previous year. The level of import price peaked at $3,315 per tonne in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Japan ($4,019 per tonne), while Singapore ($2,129 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by South Korea, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform